Panasonic Holdings v Xiaomi Technology Germany (CoA, 6 August 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In an order of 5 August 2024 (UPC_CoA_86/2024), the Court of Appeal dismissed Panasonic Holdings’ appeal against the order of the Mannheim Local Division of 9 February 2024 (UPC_CFI_223/2023, EP 2 207 270). On a Rule 333 review, the panel had upheld the judge-rapporteur’s refusal of 8 December 2023 to treat service on Xiaomi Technology Germany as valid service on four Xiaomi companies established in China and Hong Kong. A group company established in a Contracting Member State is not, without more, a place of service for its Asian parent.

Question

Does service of the statement of claim on the German subsidiary amount to service on the group companies established in China and Hong Kong, under Rule 271.5(a) or Rule 275.2?

Decision

A subsidiary’s authority to receive documents on behalf of its parent cannot be presumed (paragraph 25). Rule 271.5(a) covers only companies with their statutory seat, central administration or principal place of business within the Contracting Member States (paragraph 32). A group company cannot simply be treated as the defendant’s seat or place of business, given the principle of separation of liability, a general principle of Member State company law (paragraphs 40 and 41). Regulation 2020/1784 does not apply, so the Hague Convention governs service on the Chinese and Hong Kong companies (paragraphs 42 and 43), and service by its methods should normally be attempted before service under Rule 274.1(b) or Rule 275 (paragraph 39). Alternative service remains possible later (paragraph 45), and costs are left to the final decision (paragraphs 46 to 49).

Key points for practice

• Relying on Rule 275 to validate service on a subsidiary normally presupposes that the Hague Convention route has first been tried.
• Claimants should promptly provide the Registry with the documents and Chinese translations needed for international service.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts 24(1) and 69

Rules of Procedure

Rules 271.5, 273, 274, 275 and 333

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.